CDL.TO
Moderator
It might be called a Stadtbahn in Germany or a Light Metro in Porto. Or, quite often, simply a tram (which just so happens to be in a tunnel). But it's fair to say that it usually wouldn't be called a Metro.
|
|
|
Eglinton-Crosstown Corridor Debate
- Thread starter Dan416
- Start date
It might be called a Stadtbahn in Germany or a Light Metro in Porto. Or, quite often, simply a tram (which just so happens to be in a tunnel). But it's fair to say that it usually wouldn't be called a Metro.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
meh... ive heard people from back home call their system a subway, when its simply a tram that runs above ground for most of its route. (ie. Porto Metro)
Tuscani01
Senior Member
Nobody calls it a 'Light' Metro though... its simply called Porto Metro, or just Metro.
dowlingm
Senior Member
The 509/510 is in tunnel for part of its length. Doesn't make it a subway.
Eglinton's tunnel section (about 9km) will be probably about 1/3 of its overall length (Laird-Kennedy is 8km, Keele-Renforth 10km/Keele-Airport 14km)
Eglinton's tunnel section (about 9km) will be probably about 1/3 of its overall length (Laird-Kennedy is 8km, Keele-Renforth 10km/Keele-Airport 14km)
Tuscani01
Senior Member
I think it has to do with what someone else had said earlier in this thread... the cars being used. We use streetcars here, so if you are riding in one and go underground, you will know that you are still on a streetcar... whereas in Porto, they simply call it the Metro, and whether they go underground or above ground, they are still riding the Metro.
doady
Senior Member
^ As I noted before, streetcar and tram mean the same thing, just like subway and metro mean the same thing. Most cities in Europe use trams.
The difference with Porto is that it is light-rail only. Some light-rail only systems in the US are also called Metro, though it is still rare. That is no problem because they have no true metro (or subway).
However, the TTC is not light rail only, it also has a subway system. It doesn't make sense for the TTC to downplay the importance of existing subway network to glorify the streetcar network by branding them as the same thing. There is no system that does this as far as I far as know.
IMO, partly to avoid confusion for riders, the Eglinton LRT should only be offically labelled as a subway line if:
- it is ENTIRELY grade-separated (underground, below-grade, or elevated) with no on-street sections, like the subway
- it uses the exact same fare collection methods as the subway
- its speed is similar to the subway
- it connects to the bus network in a way similar to the subway
The difference with Porto is that it is light-rail only. Some light-rail only systems in the US are also called Metro, though it is still rare. That is no problem because they have no true metro (or subway).
However, the TTC is not light rail only, it also has a subway system. It doesn't make sense for the TTC to downplay the importance of existing subway network to glorify the streetcar network by branding them as the same thing. There is no system that does this as far as I far as know.
IMO, partly to avoid confusion for riders, the Eglinton LRT should only be offically labelled as a subway line if:
- it is ENTIRELY grade-separated (underground, below-grade, or elevated) with no on-street sections, like the subway
- it uses the exact same fare collection methods as the subway
- its speed is similar to the subway
- it connects to the bus network in a way similar to the subway
unimaginative2
Senior Member
I supported the LRT as well, though obviously with the caveat that the TTC does light rail properly. My hope is that Eglinton East and West are wide enough, and intersections infrequent enough, for it to work properly. It's also the kind of route that wouldn't be too likely to bump up against the top capacity of real light rail in the future.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
When the Gardiner Expressway is closed for repairs or resurfacing, the additional deverted traffic ends up on LakeShore and Queensway. Even with the extra traffic on the Queensway, the streetcars are not blocked. Eglinton would be same, since the LRV's will be segregated from the automobiles in the open sections.
The following photos are from an inspection of the Queensway (then called Queen Street) right-of-way on July 18, 1957:
Interesting that this right-of-way was built not just because of the Gardiner construction which forced the streetcars off the LakeShore, but also in anticipation of a Queen Street Subway from Roncesvalles eastward. The Queen Street Subway would not have used heavy rail, but light rail (or streetcars) despite the name. The original Queen Street Subway had PCC cars in their drawings of the line. The Queen Subway wasn't built however, so the right-of-way was orphaned, as it were. If the Queensway right-of-way was built today, there would be protests because High Park lost the strip of land and water from the railway north for the Queensway roadway.
After saying all that, Eglinton will be a subway. Maybe not heavy rail, but a subway none the less. It will however use light rail, similar to the original designs of the Queen Street Subway, but with newer LRV's.
The following photos are from an inspection of the Queensway (then called Queen Street) right-of-way on July 18, 1957:
Interesting that this right-of-way was built not just because of the Gardiner construction which forced the streetcars off the LakeShore, but also in anticipation of a Queen Street Subway from Roncesvalles eastward. The Queen Street Subway would not have used heavy rail, but light rail (or streetcars) despite the name. The original Queen Street Subway had PCC cars in their drawings of the line. The Queen Subway wasn't built however, so the right-of-way was orphaned, as it were. If the Queensway right-of-way was built today, there would be protests because High Park lost the strip of land and water from the railway north for the Queensway roadway.
After saying all that, Eglinton will be a subway. Maybe not heavy rail, but a subway none the less. It will however use light rail, similar to the original designs of the Queen Street Subway, but with newer LRV's.
Dan416
Senior Member
Why did Queen St. become Queensway?
adma
Superstar
I'm not sure if Queensway-in-Etobicoke was ever called "Queen Street"--however, the bits of present-day Queensway that were already extant E of the Humber were called Queen Street; hence, this was deemed the Queen Street Extension, or something like it.
Presumably, the "Queensway" identity tied it into something more modern...
Presumably, the "Queensway" identity tied it into something more modern...
JasonParis
Moderator
"Republicanway" could make it thoroughly modern.
adma
Superstar
I'm not even sure when the name "Queensway" came into use--perhaps reflecting its paralleling the then-new QEW?
Towered
Senior Member
What always strikes me about old pictures is how formal everyone looks.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
If you look at old pictures of the CNE, you will notice that almost every man is wearing a suit, tie, and hat. And it is summer.
And the women all had hats, long sleeves and long dresses.
Can you imagine going on a streetcar, bus, or subway dressed like that in the summer without air conditioning? But, it was normal back then.
I guess we are spoiled expecting all new vehicles to be air conditioned.
And the women all had hats, long sleeves and long dresses.
Can you imagine going on a streetcar, bus, or subway dressed like that in the summer without air conditioning? But, it was normal back then.
I guess we are spoiled expecting all new vehicles to be air conditioned.
fiendishlibrarian
Active Member
Much more formal times, blame the boomers and the 60s for the end of that. I saw an old Leafs game on Classic Hockey recently, 1967 Leafs and Habs, and every man in the Gardens had a jacket and tie on, the women formally dressed. I dunno, something to be said for that kind of public formality as opposed to fat, 40 year old slobs in track pants and t-shirts acting like morons...and check out the streetcar operators in the '57 photo, forage caps and knotted ties as opposed to so many drivers I see now that look like Louie De Palma from Taxi. There are some old TTC subway pics at nycsubway.org that show, even in 1969, subway operators wearing their hats. *Really* wish that kind of formality would be re-introduced somehow.
As for Eglinton...driving along it last night from Birchmount to Bayview it's wide enough, certainly, for a ROW in the middle before tunneling at Don Mills. Still don't think it'll ever be built, but meh...
As for Eglinton...driving along it last night from Birchmount to Bayview it's wide enough, certainly, for a ROW in the middle before tunneling at Don Mills. Still don't think it'll ever be built, but meh...